← Back to Search
James M. Caramanica v. North Attleboro, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20190563)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond · Filed 03-18-2019
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20190563 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by James M. Caramanica concerning records held by North Attleboro, Town of - Police Department, opened 03-18-2019. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20190563
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- James M. Caramanica
- Date Opened
- 03-18-2019
- Date Closed
- 04-01-2019
- Date Request Submitted
- 03-04-2019
- Processing Fees Charged
- 0.00
- Petitions Regarding Fees
- No
- Time to Comply
- (3-19-19)
- Went to Court
- No
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords April 1, 2019 SPR19/563 Chief John J. Reilly North Attleboro Police Department 102 South Washington St. North Attleboro, MA 02760 Dear Chief Reilly: I have· received the petition of Attorney James Caramanica appealing the nonresponse of North Attleboro Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1) Specifically, Attorney Caramanica requested 11 categories of records concerning the Department's operations and the "use of force." The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). "Public records" is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 1 O(b )(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507,511 (1995) ( custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. Conclusion Subsequent to the intervention by a member of the Public Records Division, it is my understanding that the Department provided Attorney Caramanica a response dated March 18, 2019. In light of the Department's March 18th letter, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Attorney Caramanica may appeal the substantive name of the Department's response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre• pre@sec.state.ma.us SPR19/528 Chief Reilly Page 2 April 1, 2019 Sincerely, ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: James Caramanica, Esq.